- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 12:00:43 -0500
- To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
- CC: CSS WG <www-style@w3.org>
On 2/11/10 11:41 AM, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > I don't. All I have is that browsers do not really agree. I could be > convinced to make these "exceptions" too. I do not really feel strongly, > though less exceptions seemed better. Less exceptions is definitely better, as long as it doesn't break existing content. That "as long" is the issue. >> It's not a shorthand in CSS 2.1. > > Well, CSS doesn't have versions and most browsers have implemented > overflow-x and overflow-y. This is going to be a general problem as various properties that are not shorthands become shorthands (things like white-space for example). Do we just want to take it on a case-by-case basis, or try to figure out how to handle it? For what it's worth, the Gecko behavior for "overflow" is to return a value if the x and y values are equal and to treat it as a shorthand otherwise. -Boris
Received on Thursday, 11 February 2010 17:01:18 UTC